NATIONAL DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION NET3 CONFERENCE REMARKS BY MG (RET) WILLIE B. NANCE, JR. EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, CYPRESS INTERNATIONAL INC.
|
|
- Rebecca McLaughlin
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 NATIONAL DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION NET3 CONFERENCE REMARKS BY MG (RET) WILLIE B. NANCE, JR. EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, CYPRESS INTERNATIONAL INC. Thank you for the introduction. It is a pleasure to be here. I want to thank the National Defense Industrial Association for sponsoring this conference. I also want to thank Mr. Samuel Campagna, Mr. James O Bryon, and Mr. David Grow for their hard work to pull the conference together and to host this very informative and timely discussion of topics that apply to every system under development today. It is an honor to have the opportunity to visit with you and speak. I have had the opportunity to work with many of you over the last 23 years of my Army career in planning and executing testing and training of tactical and strategic missile systems. I have benefited from your support and council and I would like to thank you for that. So I recognize the great expertise that resides in this room and the great contribution that you have made to our Nation, and to our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen. Without any doubt, you have helped provided these men and women the world s best systems and equipment.
2 Before I begin, I want to share a story. (Joke about the consultant) Now I tell this story because I realize that you are the experts in Testing, Training and Experimentation and as I share my thoughts with you, I hope I m not as off base as the consultant was with the shepherd. So for my comments today I will try to rely on my experiences over the last 15 years as a Product Manager, a Project Manager, a Program Director and a Program Executive Officer in the Army and the Missile Defense Agency for a good number of systems, most tactical, one strategic. Over the course of those years I ve had many interesting experiences as we worked to develop, test and field missile systems. In 1992, about three weeks after I became the Project Manager of the Brilliant Anti-tank Submunition, I was in Los Angeles for a review with the prime contractor, when one morning about 2:00 o clock I got a phone call. It was my test director. At the time we were conducting test of a special access piece of the system at Eglin Air Force Base. The test involved suspending the special access payload from an aerostat at an elevation above 10,000 feet. The test director told me that while the test was in progress, strong winds had caused the tethers holding the aerostat in place to break. He was careful to tell me that all safety precautions had been taken. There had been a primary tether line and a backup safety tether line and a safety valve to release the gas in case it broke
3 free. After a pause, he went on to say the aerostat was in free flight headed toward Atlanta. Now after three weeks on the job I was faced with the possibility that the first public acknowledgement of that special assess program would be a major news story on the early morning national talk shows announcing. Army blimp crashes into down town Atlanta. In the mid 80 s, while I was working as a Product manager in the TOW project office, the TOW missile was experiencing some flight test failures. The project office was working hard to solve the problem and was involved in an extensive failure analysis that was being made difficult by the fact that the failed missiles were destroyed on ground impact. The Project Office put out a world wide safety message stopping live firing of tactical rounds but allowing units to fire the training round. The training round had all the components and performance of the tactical round but it had a dummy warhead. One day we got a message from USAEUR about a training incident in which a crew had experienced a failure similar to the ones under investigation. It turned out that when the gunner launched the missile about 500 meters down range the flight motor shut off and the TOW plowed into the dirt. While continuing to observe the missile through his sight, the gunner noticed that the round seemed to come back to life. It began to bounce around on the ground and suddenly took flight but this time headed back
4 in their direction. In fact, it headed directly at them and hit the front of their vehicle. Now can you imagine the gunner trying to explain this to the crew as it was happening? These are just two experiences I encountered with testing and training. The blimp did not land in Atlanta and the TOW problem was solved. At this conference you can see and hear about the great progress that is being made to improve the equipment, methods and technologies for testing, training, exercising, diagnosing and evaluating our weapon systems under development and in operations. This progress has been made possible by the hard work from this community to find best technologies, define best practices, and to find better and more effective ways to test, characterize and validate performance and to integrate better training and diagnosing equipment and procedures. So I applaud and thank you for that work. Today, I want to offer a few thoughts and observations about the current acquisition environment; about developers, testers and users working together to achieve evolutionary, incremental capabilities; and about the importance of mission assurance. First: I believe the new 5000 series is a major step in the right direction for improving our material acquisition system and processes. I believe
5 that it effectively characterizes today s acquisition environment and the need for an evolutionary requirements and acquisition process to deliver capability in increments. I agree with the revised policy objectives that: - Encourage evolutionary acquisition strategies as the preferred approach to satisfying operational needs through the spiral development process. - Encourage evolutionary acquisition as the preferred DoD strategy for rapid acquisition of mature technology for the user in capability increments. - Encourage innovation to reduce cycle time and cost. - Encourage collaboration and teaming between the warfighter, user, developer, tester, technologists, budgeters, and sustainers. As the DoD and Services develop many of their new systems, the capability based, evolutionary spiral development approach will improve the acquisition and execution of these programs. And, greater teaming and collaboration among the user, developer and tester will be especially important.
6 Many of the new programs involve complex development efforts to integrate Battle Management Systems, Command and Control Systems, Communications Systems, Sensor Systems, Weapons Systems, Embedded Training, Testing and Diagnostic Systems, and other critical components that must all work together as prescribed to achieve the system s capability objectives. In these cases, the systems engineering, integration, design and development will involve some degree of discover to determine real capability versus expected and specified capability. Some components will work better than expected and some may not work as well as expected thus requiring trades and reallocation of performance across system and component specifications. In these developments the teaming and collaboration between the user, developer and tester will be vitally important. - For the assessment of actual performance and capability, - To provide information for performance trades and specification reallocations, - To determine the suitability and effectiveness of incremental capabilities, - To allow the decisions on a increment s military utility, and
7 - To identify changes that must be made to the next spiral to achieve objective capability. Testing, in these cases, should be to measure and validate performance, to assess suitability and effectiveness of incremental capabilities and to determine adjustments required for subsequent spirals of capability. Second: I believe test, training and mission failures must be minimized by placing greater emphasis on mission assurance in the design, development, test, production and fielding processes of weapon systems. To me, Mission Assurance means knowing that systems will work exactly as predicted and required every time they are tested or used. I believe some of the key ingredients to making mission assurance successful include: - Starting the mission assurance focus in the system s design to reduce risk and to eliminate defects and faults, - Ensuring that ground testing is conducted to cover the full range of system's required operating environments (nominal and
8 extreme), - Conducting stress tests of the system, subsystems and components to greater margins than the specification requirements. - Conducting integrated ground testing and integrated system simulations to assure we know and can predict with certainty exactly how the system will perform. - Not being hardware poor; buying enough hardware to assure rigorous and early component and system tests. - Demanding quality, validating processes and procedures, and paying attention to detail in each workmanship function, - Not accepting unverified failures, the one in a million probability of failure. These are real failures waiting to happen in a critical test or when the system is need in combat operations. Third: I do not believe that operational tests should be the first time a system is tested to its boundary operational conditions. The extreme and off nominal performance conditions must be tested during the developmental testing.
9 - Initial tests should be in defined conditions that offer high confidence for success and to allow maximum learning. - Subsequent tests should increasingly stress the system to grow confidence and understanding of performance capabilities and determine boundaries of operational capability. - With this approach, development testing can truly explore a system s performance limits and improve its probability for successful operational tests. Fourth: Today s systems must have embedded test, training, exercise, diagnostic assessment, and mission assessment instrumentation capabilities. The technology is available and the benefits to the development, test, training and deployment of systems demand this capability. I applaud this community for the great work you have done to progress the technologies and the methods of embedding and using this capability. While I was the National Missile Defense Program Director, the user and operator commands demanded that we develop and embed test, training and exercise capability (TTEC). The initial
10 reactions were that doing so would be too hard and too expensive and embedding these functions into the operational system could create risks to the systems fail safe requirement. The initial cost estimates were three quarters of a billion dollars making TTEC s implementation a major system cost driver. To address the issue, we established a team comprised of the Program Office, the User, the Operator, the Tester, the Prime Contractor and STRICOM. The result was a better requirement and an approach for reusing the operational software and embedding the functions within the operational system. The benefits of embedded capabilities are significant. - Costs are reduced. The amount of software and external equipment needed to perform these functions are reduced along with their associated development. - Embedded capabilities allow operators to train, exercise, diagnose and maintain using their operational equipment. This will increase confidence in and proficiency of the system. Last, I recommend that every chance possible, the developer, tester, and contractor test organizations should be collocated and integrated into a collaborative and combined test team. I believe this type of test
11 approach offers powerful benefits. I have come to believe that the tester should be involved in nearly every activity in the development process from concept through fielding. With such an approach: - The tester is actively involved with the formulation of system concepts, the development of program strategies and acquisition plans, participates in system design, performance trade and specification allocations, and helps get test requirements properly identified in program budgets - Participates in the defining and designing performance verification plans, models and simulations, hardware in the loops, ground tests, acceptance test equipment and other critical activities. I believe, the collocation and collaboration of the developer, tester and contractor test organizations can help the acquisition process reduce acquisition cycle time and deliver a more suitable and effective capability. Again, I want to thank you for allowing me to participate and speak today and for your great contributions to the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen serving our Nation. You can be justifiably proud of the great job you are doing. Continue your
12 insistence on excellence and demand that only the best will be placed in the hands of the men and women who depend on you to give them the best. Thank you and God bless you.
Test and Evaluation of Highly Complex Systems
Guest Editorial ITEA Journal 2009; 30: 3 6 Copyright 2009 by the International Test and Evaluation Association Test and Evaluation of Highly Complex Systems James J. Streilein, Ph.D. U.S. Army Test and
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE. FY 2014 FY 2014 OCO ## Total FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 214 Army DATE: April 213 24: Research,, Test & Evaluation, Army BA 5: System & Demonstration (SDD) COST ($ in Millions) Years FY 212 FY 213 # PE 64746A:
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. FY 2016 Base FY 2016 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Army : February 2015 2040: Research,, Test & Evaluation, Army / BA 5: System & Demonstration (SDD) COST ($ in Millions) Years FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2017
More informationAMRDEC. Core Technical Competencies (CTC)
AMRDEC Core Technical Competencies (CTC) AMRDEC PAMPHLET 10-01 15 May 2015 The Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center The U. S. Army Aviation and Missile Research Development
More informationJAVELIN ANTITANK MISSILE
JAVELIN ANTITANK MISSILE Army ACAT ID Program Total Number of Systems: Total Program Cost (TY$): Average CLU Cost (TY$): Average Missile Cost (TY$): Full-rate production: 4,348 CLUs 28,453 missiles $3618M
More informationGLOBAL BROADCAST SERVICE (GBS)
GLOBAL BROADCAST SERVICE (GBS) DoD ACAT ID Program Prime Contractor Total Number of Receive Suites: 493 Raytheon Systems Company Total Program Cost (TY$): $458M Average Unit Cost (TY$): $928K Full-rate
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Army Page 1 of 20 R-1 Line #98
Exhibit R2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Army : March 2014 2040: Research,, Test & Evaluation, Army / BA 5: System & Demonstration (SDD) COST ($ in Millions) Years FY 2013 FY 2014 R1 Program
More informationARMY MULTIFUNCTIONAL INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM-LOW VOLUME TERMINAL 2 (MIDS-LVT 2)
ARMY MULTIFUNCTIONAL INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM-LOW VOLUME TERMINAL 2 (MIDS-LVT 2) Joint ACAT ID Program (Navy Lead) Total Number of Systems: Total Program Cost (TY$): Average Unit Cost (TY$): Low-Rate
More informationInside the Beltway ITEA Journal 2008; 29: Copyright 2008 by the International Test and Evaluation Association
Inside the Beltway ITEA Journal 2008; 29: 121 124 Copyright 2008 by the International Test and Evaluation Association Enhancing Operational Realism in Test & Evaluation Ernest Seglie, Ph.D. Office of the
More informationARMY TACTICAL MISSILE SYSTEM (ATACMS) BLOCK II
ARMY TACTICAL MISSILE SYSTEM (ATACMS) BLOCK II Army ACAT ID Program Total Number of BATs: (3,487 BAT + 8,478 P3I BAT) Total Number of Missiles: Total Program Cost (TY$): Average Unit Cost (TY$): Full-rate
More informationREQUIREMENTS TO CAPABILITIES
Chapter 3 REQUIREMENTS TO CAPABILITIES The U.S. naval services the Navy/Marine Corps Team and their Reserve components possess three characteristics that differentiate us from America s other military
More informationUNCLASSIFIED FY 2016 OCO. FY 2016 Base
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Air Force Date: February 2015 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 6: RDT&E Management Support COST ($ in Millions) Prior
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE PE A: Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM) FY 2012 OCO
Exhibit R2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 212 Army DATE: February 211 24: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army COST ($ in Millions) FY 21 FY 211 PE 6545A: Joint AirtoGround Missile Total
More informationFirst Announcement/Call For Papers
AIAA Strategic and Tactical Missile Systems Conference AIAA Missile Sciences Conference Abstract Deadline 30 June 2011 SECRET/U.S. ONLY 24 26 January 2012 Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California
More informationSTATEMENT J. MICHAEL GILMORE DIRECTOR, OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE BEFORE THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY UNTIL RELEASE BY THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES U.S. SENATE STATEMENT BY J. MICHAEL GILMORE DIRECTOR, OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE BEFORE THE
More informationEvolutionary Acquisition and Spiral Development in DOD Programs: Policy Issues for Congress
Order Code RS21195 Updated December 11, 2006 Summary Evolutionary Acquisition and Spiral Development in DOD Programs: Policy Issues for Congress Gary J. Pagliano and Ronald O Rourke Specialists in National
More informationARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R-2 Exhibit)
BUDGET ACTIVITY ARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R-2 Exhibit) PE NUMBER AND TITLE 5 - ENG MANUFACTURING DEV 0604768A - BAT COST (In Thousands) FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006
More informationresource allocation decisions.
Remarks by Dr. Donald C. Winter Secretary of Navy National Defense Industry Association 2006 Naval Science and Technology Partnership Conference Marriott Wardman Park Hotel Washington, D.C. Wednesday August
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. FY 2016 Base FY 2016 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Air Force Date: February 2015 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 3: Advanced Development (ATD) COST ($ in Millions) Prior
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. R-1 Program Element (Number/Name) PE D8Z / Prompt Global Strike Capability Development. Prior Years FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Office of Secretary Of Defense Date: March 2014 0400: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide / BA 5: System Development & Demonstration
More informationSSC Pacific is making its mark as
5.3 FEATURE FROM THE SPAWAR SYSTEMS CENTER PACIFIC INTERNAL NEWSLETTER SSC Pacific C4I scoring direct hit for shore-based ballistic missile defense SSC Pacific is making its mark as a valued partner in
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE. FY 2014 FY 2014 OCO ## Total FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018
COST ($ in Millions) # ## FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 To Program Element - 0.914 1.119 0.542-0.542 0.894 0.800 0.643 0.655 Continuing Continuing 675352: Guardian Angel RDT&E - 0.914 1.119 0.542-0.542
More informationCOMMON AVIATION COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM
Section 6.3 PEO LS Program COMMON AVIATION COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM CAC2S Program Background The Common Aviation Command and Control System (CAC2S) is a modernization effort to replace the existing aviation
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. FY 2016 Base FY 2016 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Army Date: February 2015 2040: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army / BA 3: Advanced Technology Development (ATD) COST ($ in Millions) Prior
More informationMission-Based Test & Evaluation Strategy: Creating Linkages between Technology Development and Mission Capability
U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command Mission-Based Test & Evaluation Strategy: Creating Linkages between Technology Development and Mission Capability NDIA Systems Engineering Conference
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Air Force Page 1 of 5 R-1 Line #146
COST ($ in Millions) Prior Years FY 2013 FY 2014 Base OCO # Total FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Cost To Complete Total Program Element - 0.992 0.350 0.883-0.883 0.791 0.637 0.650 0.662 Continuing Continuing
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE FY 2013 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2013 Office of Secretary Of Defense DATE: February 2012 COST ($ in Millions) FY 2011 FY 2012 Total FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 To Complete Total Total
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE PE D8Z: Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program (CTEIP) FY 2011 Total Estimate. FY 2011 OCO Estimate
COST ($ in Millions) FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Cost To Complete Program Element 143.612 160.959 162.286 0.000 162.286 165.007 158.842 156.055 157.994 Continuing Continuing
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Army Page 1 of 16 R-1 Line #45
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Army Date: March 2014 2040: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army / BA 3: Advanced Technology Development (ATD) COST ($ in Millions) Prior
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE PE F: WEATHER SERVICE. FY 2011 Total Estimate. FY 2011 OCO Estimate
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2011 Air Force DATE: February 2010 COST ($ in Millions) FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 To Program Element 45.918 33.291 32.373 0.000
More informationTo obtain additional copies of this report, contact the Secondary Reports Distribution Unit at (703) (DSN ) or fax (703)
Additional Copies To obtain additional copies of this report, contact the Secondary Reports Distribution Unit at (703) 604-8937 (DSN 664-8937) or fax (703) 604-8932. Suggestions for Future Audits To suggest
More informationEvolutionary Acquisition an Spiral Development in Programs : Policy Issues for Congress
Order Code RS21195 Updated April 8, 2004 Summary Evolutionary Acquisition an Spiral Development in Programs : Policy Issues for Congress Gary J. Pagliano and Ronald O'Rourke Specialists in National Defense
More informationUNCLASSIFIED FY 2016 OCO. FY 2016 Base
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Missile Defense Agency Date: February 2015 0400: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide / BA 3: Advanced Development (ATD) COST ($
More information(FOUO) Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System Not Ready for Production Decision
Report No. DODIG-2012-121 September 7, 2012 (FOUO) Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System Not Ready for Production Decision This document contains information that may be
More informationLadies and gentlemen, it is a pleasure to once again six years for me now to
062416 Air Force Association, Reserve Officers Association and National Defense Industrial Association Capitol Hill Forum Prepared Remarks by Admiral Terry Benedict, Director of the Navy s Strategic Systems
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2013 Air Force DATE: February 2012 Program Element 16.104 48.666 19.004-19.004 19.950 31.056 31.181 31.730 Continuing Continuing 633150: Advanced Optics
More informationARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R2 Exhibit)
Budget Item Justif ication Exhibit R-2 0603460A Joint A ir-to-ground Missile (JAGM) ARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R2 Exhibit) COST (In Thousands) Actual Estimate Estimate to JOINT AIR-TO-GROUND
More informationThe Patriot Missile Failure
The Patriot Missile Failure GAO United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20548 Information Management and Technology Division B-247094 February 4, 1992 The Honorable Howard Wolpe Chairman,
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE FY 2013 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 213 Army DATE: February 212 24: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army COST ($ in Millions) FY 211 FY 212 Total FY 214 FY 215 FY 216 FY 217 Army
More informationARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R-2 Exhibit)
BUDGET ACTIVITY ARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R-2 Exhibit) PE NUMBER AND TITLE COST (In Thousands) FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Cost to Total Cost Actual Estimate Estimate
More informationThe Four-Element Framework: An Integrated Test and Evaluation Strategy
APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION IS UNLIMITED. The Four-Element Framework: An Integrated Test and Evaluation Strategy TRUTH Christopher Wilcox Army Evaluation Center Aviation Evaluation Directorate
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE PE A: ARMY INTEGRATED AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE (AIAMD) FY 2012 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2012 Army DATE: February 2011 COST ($ in Millions) FY 2010 FY 2011 MISSILE Total FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 Army Page 1 of 11 R-1 Line Item #128 To
More informationAMRDEC Fuzing Activities
Presented to: NDIA Fuze Conference 2014 AMRDEC Fuzing Activities DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Control Number: pr0898 29 July 2014 Presented by: Anthony
More informationSYSTEM DESCRIPTION & CONTRIBUTION TO JOINT VISION
F-22 RAPTOR (ATF) Air Force ACAT ID Program Prime Contractor Total Number of Systems: 339 Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Pratt &Whitney Total Program Cost (TY$): $62.5B Average Flyaway Cost (TY$): $97.9M Full-rate
More informationFuture Combat Systems
Future Combat Systems Advanced Planning Briefing for Industry (APBI) BG John Bartley 15 October Overarching Acquisition Strategy Buy Future Combat Systems; Equip Soldiers; Field Units of Action (UA) Embrace
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE PE D8Z: Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program (CTEIP) FY 2012 OCO
COST ($ in Millions) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Base FY 2012 OCO FY 2012 Total FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 Cost To Complete Total Cost Total Program Element 160.351 162.286 140.231-140.231 151.521 147.426
More informationEE 579: Digital System Testing. EECS 579 Course Goals
EE 579: Digital System Testing Lecture 1: Course Introduction and Overview John P. Hayes University of Michigan EECS 579 Fall 2001 Lecture 01: Page 1 EECS 579 Course Goals To learn about The role of testing
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE. FY 2014 FY 2014 OCO ## Total FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2014 Navy DATE: April 2013 COST ($ in Millions) Years FY 2012 FY 2013 # ## FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 To Program Element 174.037 11.276 8.610 1.971-1.971
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Army Page 1 of 10 R-1 Line #10
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Army Date: March 2014 2040: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army / BA 2: Applied Research COST ($ in Millions) Prior Years FY 2013 FY 2014
More informationUNCLASSIFIED FY 2016 OCO. FY 2016 Base
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Air Force : February 2015 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 7: Operational Systems Development COST ($ in Millions) Years
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. FY 2017 Base FY 2017 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2017 Air Force : February 2016 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 7: Operational Systems Development COST ($ in Millions) FY
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. FY 2016 Base FY 2016 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Air Force : February 2015 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 5: System Development & Demonstration (SDD) COST ($ in Millions)
More informationOffice of the Inspector General Department of Defense
o0t DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A Approved for Public Release Distribution Unlimited FOREIGN COMPARATIVE TESTING PROGRAM Report No. 98-133 May 13, 1998 Office of the Inspector General Department of Defense
More informationUNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED
: February 216 Exhibit R2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 217 2: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, / BA 5: System Development & Demonstration (SDD) COST ($ in Millions) FY 215 FY 216 R1 Program
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 213 Army DATE: February 212 24: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army COST ($ in Millions) FY 211 FY 212 Total FY 214 FY 215 FY 216 FY 217 To Complete
More informationFORCE XXI BATTLE COMMAND, BRIGADE AND BELOW (FBCB2)
FORCE XXI BATTLE COMMAND, BRIGADE AND BELOW (FBCB2) Army ACAT ID Program Prime Contractor Total Number of Systems: 59,522 TRW Total Program Cost (TY$): $1.8B Average Unit Cost (TY$): $27K Full-rate production:
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. FY 2016 Base FY 2016 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Air Force : February 2015 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 7: Operational Systems Development COST ($ in Millions) FY
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE FY 2013 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2013 Air Force DATE: February 2012 COST ($ in Millions) FY 2011 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Air Force Page 1 of 14 R-1 Line #216 To Program Element
More informationTHEATER HIGH ALTITUDE AREA DEFENSE (THAAD)
THEATER HIGH ALTITUDE AREA DEFENSE (THAAD) Army ACAT ID Program Prime Contractor Total Number of Missiles: 1250 Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Total Program Cost (TY$): $23,000M (w/o&s costs) Sunnyvale,
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE FY 2013 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2013 United States Special Operations Command DATE: February 2012 COST ($ in Millions) FY 2011 FY 2012 Total FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 To Complete
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Air Force Page 1 of 15 R-1 Line #232
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Air Force : March 2014 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 7: Operational Systems Development COST ($ in Millions) # FY
More informationDepartment of Defense DIRECTIVE
Department of Defense DIRECTIVE NUMBER 5134.09 September 17, 2009 DA&M SUBJECT: Missile Defense Agency (MDA) References: See Enclosure 1 1. PURPOSE. This Directive, in accordance with the authority vested
More informationTest and Evaluation and the ABCs: It s All about Speed
Invited Article ITEA Journal 2009; 30: 7 10 Copyright 2009 by the International Test and Evaluation Association Test and Evaluation and the ABCs: It s All about Speed Steven J. Hutchison, Ph.D. Defense
More informationSoldier Division Director David Libersat June 2, 2015
Soldier Division Director David Libersat June 2, 2015 Soldier Division Maneuver Center of Excellence Soldier Division develops future requirements and manages Soldier capabilities for all Soldiers across
More informationCommand Overview USASMDC/ARSTRAT. for the Huntsville Rotary Club. LTG Richard P. Formica 20 Sep Distribution A 1291 (As of 20 Sep 2011)
USASMDC/ARSTRAT Command Overview for the Huntsville Rotary Club LTG Richard P. Formica 20 Sep 2011 1 Our Reporting Chain Our Mission USASMDC/ARSTRAT conducts space and missile defense operations and provides
More informationRECORD VERSION STATEMENT BY THE HONORABLE MARK T. ESPER SECRETARY OF THE ARMY BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE
RECORD VERSION STATEMENT BY THE HONORABLE MARK T. ESPER SECRETARY OF THE ARMY BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE FIRST SESSION, 115TH CONGRESS ON THE CURRENT STATE OF DEPARTMENT
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. Close Combat Weapon Systems JAVELIN. Systems in Combat TOW ITAS LOSAT
Close Combat Weapon Systems JAVELIN TOW ITAS Systems in Combat LOSAT February 2005 Mission Statement Provide the Soldier with Superior Technology and Logistic Support to Meet the Requirement for Close
More informationDOD MANUAL ACCESSIBILITY OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY (ICT)
DOD MANUAL 8400.01 ACCESSIBILITY OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY (ICT) Originating Component: Office of the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense Effective: November 14, 2017
More informationOFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FUNCTIONAL AND PHYSICAL CONFIGURATION AUDITS OF THE ARMY PALADIN PROGRAM
w m. OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FUNCTIONAL AND PHYSICAL CONFIGURATION AUDITS OF THE ARMY PALADIN PROGRAM Report No. 96-130 May 24, 1996 1111111 Li 1.111111111iiiiiwy» HUH iwh i tttjj^ji i ii 11111'wrw
More informationFIGHTER DATA LINK (FDL)
FIGHTER DATA LINK (FDL) Joint ACAT ID Program (Navy Lead) Prime Contractor Total Number of Systems: 685 Boeing Platform Integration Total Program Cost (TY$): $180M Data Link Solutions FDL Terminal Average
More informationRapid Development and Integration of Remote Weapon Systems to Meet Operational Requirements Abstract October 2009
Small Arms Air Platform Integration Rapid Development and Integration of Remote Weapon Systems to Meet Operational Requirements Abstract 8851 28-October 2009 Joseph Burkart Crane Division, Naval Surface
More informationLawrence Livermore National Lab Perspective
Lawrence Livermore National Lab Perspective Building a Strong Partnership with DoD and DoD Industry for National Security 41 st Air Armament Symposium, Ft. Walton Beach, Florida November 3, 2015 Lara D.
More informationUnmanned Aerial Vehicle Operations
MCWP 3-42.1 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Operations U.S. Marine Corps DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited PCN 143 000141 00 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY Headquarters United
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. FY 2016 Base FY 2016 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Air Force : February 2015 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 7: Operational Systems Development COST ($ in Millions) FY
More informationLessons in Innovation: The SSBN Tactical Control System Upgrade
Lessons in Innovation: The SSBN Tactical Control System Upgrade By Captain John Zimmerman ** In late 2013, the Submarine Force decided to modernize the 1990's combat systems on OHIO- Class submarines.
More informationPrepared for Milestone A Decision
Test and Evaluation Master Plan For the Self-Propelled Artillery Weapon (SPAW) Prepared for Milestone A Decision Approval Authority: ATEC, TACOM, DASD(DT&E), DOT&E Milestone Decision Authority: US Army
More informationOperational Testing of New Field Artillery Systems by LTC(P) B. H. Ellis and LTC R. F. Bell
Operational Testing of New Field Artillery Systems by LTC(P) B. H. Ellis and LTC R. F. Bell From January 1982 to April 1983, four new field artillery systems The Battery Computer System (BCS), the fire
More informationMULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM (MLRS) M270A1 LAUNCHER
MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM (MLRS) M270A1 LAUNCHER Army ACAT IC Program Prime Contractor Total Number of Systems: 857 Lockheed Martin Vought Systems Total Program Cost (TY$): $2,297.7M Average Unit Cost
More informationAnalysis of Precision Mortar fires for the IBCT
Unclassified 43 rd Annual Guns & Missiles Symposium 21-24 April 2008 Analysis of Precision Mortar fires for the IBCT Rollie Dohrn Technical Director, PGMM, ATK Slide 1 Outline PGMM Operational Analysis
More informationDISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A
IFPC Inc 2-I DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 31 IFPC Inc 2-I Mission Mission: Primary Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2 Intercept (IFPC Inc
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Office of Secretary Of Defense Page 1 of 6 R-1 Line #29
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Office of Secretary Of Defense Date: March 2014 0400: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide / BA 3: Advanced Technology Development
More informationUNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED
: February 26 Exhibit R2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 27 2: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, / BA 7: Operational Systems Development COST ($ in Millions) FY 25 FY 26 R Program Element
More informationUNCLASSIFIED R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2013 Air Force DATE: February 2012 COST ($ in Millions) FY 2011 FY 2012 Base OCO Total FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Cost To Complete Total Cost Total
More informationWARFIGHTER FOCUSED. Training Systems
WARFIGHTER FOCUSED Training Systems Advanced Training Systems for the Warfighter Kratos exhibits the knowledge and skills to put together a lifecycle training program to support your specific training
More informationLast spring, the world eagerly followed reports of a dead satellite containing harmful materials on a crash course with the earth.
Remarks by The Honorable BJ Penn Secretary of the Navy (Acting) Joint Integrated Air and Missile Defense Summit Huntsville, Alabama Wednesday, April 8, 2009 Good evening and thank you. It s a real pleasure
More informationThe Army Executes New Network Modernization Strategy
The Army Executes New Network Modernization Strategy Lt. Col. Carlos Wiley, USA Scott Newman Vivek Agnish S tarting in October 2012, the Army began to equip brigade combat teams that will deploy in 2013
More informationNDIA Ground Robotics Symposium
NDIA Ground Robotics Symposium Mr. Tom Dee DASN ELM 703-614-4794 Pentagon 4C746 1 Agenda Context Current environment Robotics Way Ahead AAV MRAP Family of Vehicles 2 ELM Portfolio U.S. Marine Corps ground
More informationM&S for OT&E - Examples
Example 1 Aircraft OT&E Example 3.4.1. Modeling & Simulation. The F-100 fighter aircraft will use the Aerial Combat Simulation (ACS) to support evaluations of F-100 operational effectiveness in air-to-air
More informationTHE MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM: HEALTH AFFAIRS/TRICARE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY OVERVIEW STATEMENT BY MAJOR GENERAL ELDER GRANGER, MD
THE MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM: HEALTH AFFAIRS/TRICARE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY OVERVIEW STATEMENT BY MAJOR GENERAL ELDER GRANGER, MD DEPUTY DIRECTOR, TRICARE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY BEFORE THE MILITARY PERSONNEL SUBCOMMITTEE
More informationUNCLASSIFIED FY 2016 OCO. FY 2016 Base
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2016 Army Date: February 2015 2040: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army / BA 3: Advanced Technology Development (ATD) COST ($ in Millions) Prior
More informationCRS Report for Congress
Order Code RS21305 Updated January 3, 2006 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Summary Navy Littoral Combat Ship (LCS): Background and Issues for Congress Ronald O Rourke Specialist in
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. R-1 Program Element (Number/Name) PE D8Z / Operational Energy Capability Improvement. Prior Years FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Office of Secretary Of Defense Date: March 2014 0400: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide / BA 3: Advanced Technology Development
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE PE A: Biometrics Enabled Intelligence FY 2012 OCO
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2012 Army DATE: February 2011 COST ($ in Millions) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 To Program Element - 14.114 15.018-15.018 15.357 15.125
More informationNAVAIR Commander s Awards recognize teams for excellence
NAVAIR News Release NAVAIR Commander Vice Adm. David Architzel kicks of the 11th annual NAVAIR Commander's National Awards Ceremony at Patuxent River, Md., June 22. (U.S. Navy photo) PATUXENT RIVER, Md.
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Navy Page 1 of 5 R-1 Line #19
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Navy Date: March 2014 1319: Research, elopment, Test & Evaluation, Navy / BA 3: Advanced Technology elopment (ATD) COST ($ in Millions) Prior Years
More informationRELIABILITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR LAUNCH VEHICLE COMMAND DESTRUCT SYSTEMS
PAGE 1 OF 5 PREFERRED RELIABILITY PRACTICES RELIABILITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR LAUNCH VEHICLE Practice: Use built-in redundancies, safe and arm provisions, approved and qualified initiators and detonators,
More informationUNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Air Force Page 1 of 15 R-1 Line #222
Exhibit R-2, RDT&E Budget Item Justification: PB 2015 Air Force : March 2014 3600: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Air Force / BA 7: Operational Systems Development COST ($ in Millions) (+) #
More informationTest and Evaluation Strategies for Network-Enabled Systems
ITEA Journal 2009; 30: 111 116 Copyright 2009 by the International Test and Evaluation Association Test and Evaluation Strategies for Network-Enabled Systems Stephen F. Conley U.S. Army Evaluation Center,
More informationARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R-2 Exhibit)
BUDGET ACTIVITY ARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R-2 Exhibit) PE NUMBER AND TITLE Sensor Tech COST (In Thousands) FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Cost to Total Cost
More informationRDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION SHEET (R-2 Exhibit) MAY 2009 APPROPRIATION / BUDGET ACTIVITY RDT&E, DEFENSE-WIDE / 7
RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION SHEET (R-2 Exhibit) DATE MAY 2009 APPROPRIATION / BUDGET ACTIVITY RDT&E, DEFENSE-WIDE / 7 R-1 ITEM NOMENCLATURE / PROJECT NO. PE 1160404BB Special Operations (SO) Tactical
More information